ARES: light attack aircraft that never happened ...

March 30, 2017, 02:57 PM

arabiancowboy

quote:
Originally posted by Strambo:
quote:
Originally posted by Hound Dog:
quote:
Originally posted by tanksoldier:
quote:
They would rather send a $100 million F-35 against a goat-herder in a mud shack than send something costing a tenth that much

...which may see the Army with armed fixed-wing aircraft again in the foreseeable future.

I am all for this, but I don't ever see it happening.

IMO, the USAF would fight tooth and nail against the Army having a significant fixed-wing capability, even if it's for a mission the USAF doesn't really seem to care much about.

They don't want to do CAS/close support, and they don't want anybody else to do it, either. That may be an overly-pessimistic assessment of the current situation, but it's the way I see it.

That isn't overly-pessimistic, it's the sad truth. I think the USMC only got away with insisting on having their own CAS (and everything else) because they are so small (plus the nature of expeditionary ops).

Turning fixed-wing CAS over to the Army would make the most operational sense. AF would stick to strategic air missions and air superiority.

I totally disagree. The Army has mismanaged its UAS fleet and AWT fleet; why would it do better than the AF with a FW fleet? Also, since the vast majority of air to ground attacks in our current wars are neither CAS nor stat bombing, but rather SCAR/AI, who do you propose does that mission?

I frequently see discussions like this on SF. Army, I like you guys and work my ass off for you. I'm sure you've had some run ins with USAF pilots who didn't prioritize you. That sucks, and they're wrong. But air ops are harder than they look, and you're frequently a more difficult customer than you think. And you almost never have the full picture of the battle-space required to adjudicate limited assets appropriately. Army FW CAS makes zero operational sense, not to mention you lack any infrastructure to support it.

March 30, 2017, 03:01 PM

FlyingScot

Arabian Cowboy - from someone who tasks the various assets and is in the "know"...what are your thoughts on a super simple, maneuverable gun based airframe like this? Useful?

What doesn't it offer that would need to be added if as these move up? This is a very different platform than Scorpion (more a middleweight than "light" CAS) and even the Texan or Tucano. The practical view is always enlightening, even it steps on our internet dreamers

March 30, 2017, 03:11 PM

Voshterkoff

I think it's silly to invest in bullshit dirt farm policing planes. We should sell them to the native air force, for a healthy profit. USAF should stick to being the wrath of god.

March 30, 2017, 03:23 PM

arabiancowboy

quote:
Originally posted by FlyingScot:
Arabian Cowboy - from someone who tasks the various assets and is in the "know"...what are your thoughts on a super simple, maneuverable gun based airframe like this? Useful?

What doesn't it offer that would need to be added if as these move up? This is a very different platform than Scorpion (more a middleweight than "light" CAS) and even the Texan or Tucano. The practical view is always enlightening, even it steps on our internet dreamers

The gun just is not super useful in CT/COIN type combat. I've seen every platform with a gun shoot, at some point, ground targets during the past 14 years with the exception of F-22s. Great for area suppression on the rare occasions that's needed. Great for containment fires. But for strike, I almost always want an AGM, PGM or LGB in the current environment. An AT-802, Scorpion, AT-6 or A-29 (even an OV-10G) can all deliver precision fires for pennies on the dollar compared to our current fighter fleet. The new AC-130J is an awesome castle of fucking doom, but I'll leave that out of the discussion since it's so expensive and not in the ARES category. My take is the USAF needs this capability and is stupid for not having invested in it earlier. But to think the Army could do what we're doing better is to ignore the reality that the Army has used the aviation assets it has in a far more inefficient manner the the USAF.

March 30, 2017, 09:03 PM

JR78

quote:
Originally posted by Hound Dog:
The Air Force simply doesn't WANT a low cost 'affordable' ground attack aircraft. If we did, we would still be flying something like the Douglas A-1 Skyraider (VERY rugged piston-engine attack plane designed in WWII, seeing service in Korea and Vietnam). There is no prestige involved in this kind of fighting, and the USAF just loves high speed pointy invisible overcomplicated jets that cost obscene amounts of money.

Back in the 70s, Piper built the Piper PA-48 Enforcer. It was basically this same kind of low cost COIN (counter-insurgency) aircraft, based on the P-51 design. It was apparently a decent design that tested well, but the USAF wasn't interested then, just as they aren't interested now in any such aircraft.

They would rather send a $100 million F-35 against a goat-herder in a mud shack than send something costing a tenth that much. It's an institutional hang-up; one of many I have seen in the past 30 years.

Because the 0-6/0-7's wouldn't have have a job after retirement

March 30, 2017, 09:42 PM

RHINOWSO

quote:
The gun just is not super useful in CT/COIN type combat. I've seen every platform with a gun shoot, at some point, ground targets during the past 14 years with the exception of F-22s. Great for area suppression on the rare occasions that's needed. Great for containment fires. But for strike, I almost always want an AGM, PGM or LGB in the current environment.

Winner winner, chicken dinner.

Everyone gets all hot and bothered by strafing, but in 99% of situations, you want something that goes BOOM on target. It just gets a lot more done, a lot more accurately.

AC also hit the nail on the head about CT/COIN aircraft... the USN / USAF have fucked that opportunity away at every possible juncture...

But to think that green suiters are going to strap on an A10 or other FW aircraft and be the masters of CAS... well, then why aren't their AWTs masters at it already? Because they act like it's a tank, not a RW CAS asset, that's why.